Australian Politics Forum - SUBs Verses NBN

____ Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 33410 Australia Gender:	SUBs Verses NBN May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am Priority, which is more important for Australia A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion or a modern National Broadband for around the same price. If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?
Back to top	IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #1 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Back to top

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #2 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:22am

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Why the disproportion towards the Subs. What do they bring to the Australian economy.

Back to top

IP Logged

BigOl64 Gold Member Offline Posts: 14438 Townsville QLD Gender:	Re: SUBs Verses NBN Reply #3 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:24am Long range forward defence of our nation, pffft; give me faster down-loadable porn as my first priority, any day. There is not question which is more important.
Back to top	IP Logged

Gist

Gold Member

Offline

I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5476

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #4 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:25am

Never mind food production. The battle there is to get it overseas while still fresh because, as it may have escaped some of you, we're a long way from everyone else (assuming we're not talking live sheep or cattle exports which have their own problems).

Far better is to produce crops for fuels. No issues there with freshness once the crop has been converted to biofuel. We could supply the world with the next generation of green fuels.

Back to top

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australia’s interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)

IP Logged

Armchair_Politician

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29448
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #5 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:27am

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:22am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Why the disproportion towards the Subs. What do they bring to the Australian economy.

I don't know about you, but given that we are a land-locked country the Navy has an extremely important role to play in keeping our country secure and at present, of the six Collins Class submarines, only one at any time is able to be at sea. This is not good enough. While the chances of a confrontation with another country are low, that doesn't mean we should become complacent about our national security either.

Back to top

IP Logged

Gist

Gold Member

Offline

I am not a sock, I am
a human being!

Posts: 5476

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #6 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:29am

Oh, and to answer the question (sorry Woody)...

The NBN infrastructure will make all kinds of new industry possible and will do it across Australia, not just in the capital cities. For the first time ever, regional centres could compete on an equal footing, not just with the capital cities but with the rest of the world.

Subs... well... if we could make a good one like the Japs did then maybe we could sell some. But our record so far isn't too good.

Back to top

"When our military goes to war it should be for purposes and objectives clearly in Australia’s interests, not merely because the Americans want some company" - Malcolm Fraser (2012 Whitlam Oration)

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #7 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:32am

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:27am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:22am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Why the disproportion towards the Subs. What do they bring to the Australian economy.

I don't know about you, but given that we are a land-locked country the Navy has an extremely important role to play in keeping our country secure and at present, of the six Collins Class submarines, only one at any time is able to be at sea. This is not good enough. While the chances of a confrontation with another country are low, that doesn't mean we should become complacent about our national security either.

Is this why we are unable to keep illegal Japanese Whalers out of our waters.

Because we have to use subs, not spy planes or boats.

If we are spending $40 billion on subs, will we defend our antarctic region from China and others when the mineral sector force LibLab to support mining after 2020?

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #8 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:34am

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:32am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:27am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:22am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Why the disproportion towards the Subs. What do they bring to the Australian economy.

I don't know about you, but given that we are a land-locked country the Navy has an extremely important role to play in keeping our country secure and at present, of the six Collins Class submarines, only one at any time is able to be at sea. This is not good enough. While the chances of a confrontation with another country are low, that doesn't mean we should become complacent about our national security either.

Is this why we are unable to keep illegal Japanese Whalers out of our waters.

Because we have to use subs, not spy planes or boats.

If we are spending $40 billion on subs, will we defend our antarctic region from China and others when the mineral sector force LibLab to support mining after 2020?

We dont use our war machines for greens ideology. Thank goodness the greens will never be in power.

Back to top

IP Logged

Armchair_Politician

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29448
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #9 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:37am

Gist wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:29am:

Oh, and to answer the question (sorry Woody)...

The NBN infrastructure will make all kinds of new industry possible and will do it across Australia, not just in the capital cities. For the first time ever, regional centres could compete on an equal footing, not just with the capital cities but with the rest of the world.

Subs... well... if we could make a good one like the Japs did then maybe we could sell some. But our record so far isn't too good.

Our current fleet of Collins Class submarines are very good submarines, they are just not up to scratch with their systems - there have been integration problems galore. Mechanically, our diesel submarines are far more quiet than nuclear-powered submarines of the US, UK or Russian Navies. My wife's uncle works on our Collins submarines in Western Australia. During an exercise off the US coast a few years ago, one of our submarines shadowed a US nuclear attack submarine for a number of hours and the Captain of the US submarine was oblivious to the presence of the Australian one until our submarine "pinged" the American one. The downside to diesel submarines is that they need to regularly surface to recharge the batteries and change the air onboard whereas nuclear submarines can (theoretically) stay submerged for as long as the crew wants to. A diesel submarine will almost always hear a nuclear submarine first - we just need submarines that have a higher availability rate and better combat systems integration.

Back to top

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #10 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:43am

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:34am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:32am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:27am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:22am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Why the disproportion towards the Subs. What do they bring to the Australian economy.

I don't know about you, but given that we are a land-locked country the Navy has an extremely important role to play in keeping our country secure and at present, of the six Collins Class submarines, only one at any time is able to be at sea. This is not good enough. While the chances of a confrontation with another country are low, that doesn't mean we should become complacent about our national security either.

Is this why we are unable to keep illegal Japanese Whalers out of our waters.

Because we have to use subs, not spy planes or boats.

If we are spending $40 billion on subs, will we defend our antarctic region from China and others when the mineral sector force LibLab to support mining after 2020?

We dont use our war machines for greens ideology. Thank goodness the greens will never be in power.

Protecting Australian water from illegal activity is now green ideology.

How about coastal drug running, do the right want to class this as green ideology too?

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #11 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:47am

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:43am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:34am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:32am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:27am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:22am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:17am:

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:15am:

Priority, which is more important for Australia

A modern fleet of Subs for over $40 billion

or a modern National Broadband for around the same price.

If one had to be cut back, which one would you like to see cut and why?

$10billion from the subs and $20billion from the NBN

Then $30billion for food production infrastructure.

Why the disproportion towards the Subs. What do they bring to the Australian economy.

I don't know about you, but given that we are a land-locked country the Navy has an extremely important role to play in keeping our country secure and at present, of the six Collins Class submarines, only one at any time is able to be at sea. This is not good enough. While the chances of a confrontation with another country are low, that doesn't mean we should become complacent about our national security either.

Is this why we are unable to keep illegal Japanese Whalers out of our waters.

Because we have to use subs, not spy planes or boats.

If we are spending $40 billion on subs, will we defend our antarctic region from China and others when the mineral sector force LibLab to support mining after 2020?

We dont use our war machines for greens ideology. Thank goodness the greens will never be in power.

Protecting Australian water from illegal activity is now green ideology.

How about coastal drug running, do the right want to class this as green ideology too?

Dont be a fool. You said whales, not drugs. In any event, it should be coast guard activity, not war machines.

Back to top

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #12 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:51am

____ wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:43am:

Protecting Australian water from illegal activity is now green ideology.

How about coastal drug running, do the right want to class this as green ideology too?

No, but using our submarines to do the job, is.

We don't spend $40 bil to protect whales against the japs.

This happens every time you start a thread that has defence implications.

Subs are long range strategic defence assets, not a tool for greenpeace activist.

BTW you don't need Subs to catch drug runners, the coast guard has aircraft and surface ships for that.

Back to top

IP Logged

____

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male

Re: SUBs Verses NBN
Reply #13 - May 4^th, 2012 at 9:55am

progressiveslol wrote on May 4^th, 2012 at 9:47am: